should I sell all my Nikon stuff to buy an M8?

[earlyadopter]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Looking for an advice:

 

== Should I sell all my Nikon stuff to buy a used M8?

 

I have a D2H with non-working auto-exposure (i.e., could use in manual mode only -- a major minus as I do street photography mostly, and repair cost about the same as a working camera, i.e. mine worth almost nothing), and several good lenses. All of which I almost stopped using, and which could be sold totally for about what an M8 is possible to find on ebay.

I also have M6 with few M-lenses, and enjoy it (but would love it to be digital).

 

For sure can't afford M9.

 

What brings doubts about M8:

- I tried M8 for 3 days, and wasn't impressed with responsiveness. I want sometimes to be able to click faster than it gives me control back between the shots (or series of shots), while it still writing files on a card, and for some reason don't want to do that in parallel.

- I don't like the idea of a crop-factor on M-lenses.

 

Alternative is to buy for ~1K a used D2X or any other relatively cheap Nikon body. But I don't like to carry around this heavy stuff, and scare people.

 

So: knowing that M9 exists, not being able to buy it, tried M8 — would you suggest to get rid of Nikon stuff and go with M8?

[haroldp]

D300 is in most ways a better camera than a D2x, cheaper and lighter.

 

If you are looking for multiple shot speed, than M8 or M9 is not for you

 

If you don't like crop factor, than D700 is a good choice.

 

All above are much better than D2H, except in multiple shot speed.

 

Good used copies of either should be readily available.

 

Regards ... H

[Sailronin]

Sounds like a candidate for a D700.

[earlyadopter]

Well, I don't have $2400 for a D700 either. The idea was not to spend another $2K+ but to either get rid of all the Nikon lenses (for those $2K+) and buy an M8, or forget about M8, and buy a cheap Nikon body (spending a thousand at most).

 

And I just don't like to carry a heavy bag with me -- that's why was thinking about Leica.

[ho_co]

Early, I've been rangefinder-only since the 1970's, but bought a D200 when it didn't look as if Leica was going to notice the movement to digital.

 

When the M8 came out, I bought it and I love it. I think the colors are better, and I very seldom need to sharpen an image before printing it. The pictures sparkle.

 

In addition, it's compact, not so in-your-face, not so me-too. It's comfortable and natural. The M8 is the clear winner for me.

 

 

Nonetheless, I'm contemplating getting out of Leica and upgrading my Nikon stuff. Even though I despise the Nikon's bulk and its images, I'm considering going that way.

 

1) I'm older and flimsier, and the VR lenses give me more stability.

2) As much as I love the Leica, and as much respect as I have for Solms and Allendale and their employees, the M8 spends too much time in for repair.

3) If I want a focal length I don't have, a Leica lens will cost me two to four times as much as a Nikkor. (But then, the Leica lens will also give me more pleasure in use than the Nikkor.)

 

 

I won't ever advise someone not to buy a Leica. It's a dream of a camera, and its pictures are unsurpassed. Everyone should have the opportunity of working with it.

 

But it is hellishly expensive, and all the time I save in front of the computer by not having to tweak the M8's files as much as the Nikon's, I lose again sending the camera off for upgrade or repairing something messed up in a previous repair.

 

So you're on your own. I hope I come back to my senses before I dump my Leicas.

 

Good luck in making the decision. You owe it to yourself to get the Leica, just to see whether I'm crazy.

 

But if you've got a range of lenses, consider how much flexibility you'd give up if you traded your equipment for Leica. You'd probably be better off either getting the D2H repaired or trading it for the D300 and giving yourself more time to think about it.

[stonearabiapix]

You might want to check out this review, before you buy.

Leica M8 Field Test, Iraq

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There was a medium-long thread here on the "Iraq field test" article at the time: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/55976-leica-m8-bashed-michael-kamber.html.

 

See also: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/72757-photojournalist-shooting-m8-out-there.html.

 

 

Most of Kamber's valid complaints have been solved, and actually had been solved by the time he posted the article. He also has some misunderstandings about the camera, but he's entitled to his opinion.

 

As he says on the first page, a lot of professional photographers like the M8, but it wasn't suited for his use in Iraq.

[johntobias]

You have an M6, if you use it and like it, then sell the body and perhaps a nik lens and go for the m8....I sold off all my canon kit and an M2 to buy a used M8 last year and never looked back....crop factor never been a prob for me, also remember, the nikon stuff is really bulky and best for different types of subject.,

 

The most expensive gear is the stuff you don't use, if bulk means its left at home....flog it!

 

I rarely venture out without my 'tiny' 3 lens outfit , all neatly packed into a hadley digital billingham bag...if its compact, you'll take it with and use it!...whole essence of Leica gear imho

 

nice choice to have though!...best wishes deciding

[ljclark]

- I tried M8 for 3 days, and wasn't impressed with responsiveness. I want sometimes to be able to click faster than it gives me control back between the shots (or series of shots), while it still writing files on a card, and for some reason don't want to do that in parallel.

- I don't like the idea of a crop-factor on M-lenses.

 

When you tried the M8, were you saving RAW only? Or RAW + JPEG? I stopped shooting RAW + JPEG once I found out how easy M8 DNG files were to work with. The M8 is much faster in the DNG-only mode (I also shoot Nikon digital and seem to fuss around more with those files --or it could be an entirely self-induced delusion.)

 

The crop factor stopped being an issue after a couple of months. I mostly shoot with the superb Zeiss 25mm and a 35mm Summicron. And I found that I liked the "tweener" characteristics of a 50mm on the M8 and use my pre-ASPH Summilux more on the M8 than I ever did with my M6 bodies.

 

I don't shoot as many frames with the M8 as I do when using my Nikons (pair of D300s), but I get a higher percentage of images that I like.

[Logic108]

I traded my Canon gear to get the M8.2 plus two great lenses. Haven't regretted it for a second. Why not? Because I found that I love rangefinder photography. Perhaps the biggest benefit for rangefinder photography is the small size ans easy portability. But this has always been the case. It's basically an old rangefinder v´s SLR debate.

1. If you like fast then stick with SLR.

2. If you don't mind carrying a lot of gear then stick with SLR.

3. If you don't mind sticking out then stick with SLR.

[john_newell]

Look for a dealer who will rent an M8. That is the best way to find out whether the M system will work for you or not. I rented an M8 and 75mm Summarit for US$100 for a week. Possibly the best $100 I've spent on photography in quite a while.

 

 

Looking for an advice:

 

== Should I sell all my Nikon stuff to buy a used M8?

 

I have a D2H with non-working auto-exposure (i.e., could use in manual mode only -- a major minus as I do street photography mostly, and repair cost about the same as a working camera, i.e. mine worth almost nothing), and several good lenses. All of which I almost stopped using, and which could be sold totally for about what an M8 is possible to find on ebay.

I also have M6 with few M-lenses, and enjoy it (but would love it to be digital).

 

For sure can't afford M9.

 

What brings doubts about M8:

- I tried M8 for 3 days, and wasn't impressed with responsiveness. I want sometimes to be able to click faster than it gives me control back between the shots (or series of shots), while it still writing files on a card, and for some reason don't want to do that in parallel.

- I don't like the idea of a crop-factor on M-lenses.

 

Alternative is to buy for ~1K a used D2X or any other relatively cheap Nikon body. But I don't like to carry around this heavy stuff, and scare people.

 

So: knowing that M9 exists, not being able to buy it, tried M8 — would you suggest to get rid of Nikon stuff and go with M8?

[Islandmike]

My two-pennoth (two cents) for what it's worth.

 

Until a few months ago, I shot exclusively on Nikon DSLR cameras, doing so for a major part of my living.

 

Needing to replace one out-dated Nikon body in order to have a back-up camera with sufficient pixel count, I added an M8 pus a couple of lenses to my kit. the thinking being that rather than having a spare DSLR body that sat in the case doing nothing, I would have a back-up camera that would be used on a regular basis when it's characteristics make it more suitable for use than a DSLR.

 

The Leica is now used more than the Nikon, because it's a joy to use and the results are better. The Nikon has become the back-up camera, but is still used for interiors, food and other shots where the RF camera is pretty hopeless.

 

Crop factor is to my mind a complete red herring. If the camera is of an acceptable size and weight and you get sufficient pixel count / resolution / overall image quality for the kind of pictures you take, it does not actually matter whether the sensor measures 5 millimetres or 100 millimetres.

 

Conclusion - if you can do so, keep the Nikon and add an M8 to your kit. You can then enjoy the best of both worlds.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

[MikeMyers]

I have a D2H with non-working auto-exposure (i.e., could use in manual mode only -- a major minus as I do street photography mostly, and repair cost about the same as a working camera, i.e. mine worth almost nothing), and several good lenses. All of which I almost stopped using, and which could be sold totally for about what an M8 is possible to find on ebay.

I also have M6 with few M-lenses, and enjoy it (but would love it to be digital).

 

I used to use a D2h, but found it very frustrating. I replaced it with a D2x and was much happier - Nikon learned from the D2h, and the D2x was more reliable for me.

 

After reading what you wrote, I found myself thinking that maybe you should simply buy a good exposure meter, and stop there. Check the meters at CameraQuest Home Page and if you don't use them on your Nikon, they'll be usable on an old Leica.

 

Nobody but you can decide if a M8 or the Nikon is better for the type of photos you take. The Nikon can do much of what the M8 can do, but certainly not the other way 'round.

 

The best answer as I see it is to find a way to have both, and use whichever one is appropriate for what you do. If you never use one or the other, then you can sell that one.

 

I'm sure others will say I'm wrong here, but I'd suggest reading more on Ken Rockwell's site, KenRockwell.com and just think about it for several months before doing anything. You may well enjoy using the Leica more than the D2h, but it's unlikely to make all that big a change in the results you get.

[Printmaker]

My two-pennoth (two cents) for what it's worth.

 

Until a few months ago, I shot exclusively on Nikon DSLR cameras, doing so for a major part of my living.

 

Needing to replace one out-dated Nikon body in order to have a back-up camera with sufficient pixel count, I added an M8 pus a couple of lenses to my kit. the thinking being that rather than having a spare DSLR body that sat in the case doing nothing, I would have a back-up camera that would be used on a regular basis when it's characteristics make it more suitable for use than a DSLR.

 

The Leica is now used more than the Nikon, because it's a joy to use and the results are better. The Nikon has become the back-up camera, but is still used for interiors, food and other shots where the RF camera is pretty hopeless.

 

Crop factor is to my mind a complete red herring. If the camera is of an acceptable size and weight and you get sufficient pixel count / resolution / overall image quality for the kind of pictures you take, it does not actually matter whether the sensor measures 5 millimetres or 100 millimetres.

 

Conclusion - if you can do so, keep the Nikon and add an M8 to your kit. You can then enjoy the best of both worlds.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

 

I'm with Mike. I kept my Nikon gear and use them for catalog work (D2X/60 micro) and when I'm working from a boat (D2x/80-200/24-120). Other than art repro, which is done with a 4x5 with a BetterLight back, everything else is shot with a M8.

 

I considered a full frame D3 to replace the D2x but then I'd need a 200-400 and either a 85 tilt/shift or a 105 micro to get the job done. That's $9 - $12k to replace a kit that is working just fine. Besides, 12 MB DX is fine for ads and the occasional poster. I'd rather drop the money on a M9.

 

Mike: My great grandmother was a mail order bride from the Outer Hebrides. We might be distant cousins...

 

Tom

[brianv]

There was a medium-long thread here on the "Iraq field test" article at the time: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/55976-leica-m8-bashed-michael-kamber.html.

 

See also: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/72757-photojournalist-shooting-m8-out-there.html.

 

 

Most of Kamber's valid complaints have been solved, and actually had been solved by the time he posted the article. He also has some misunderstandings about the camera, but he's entitled to his opinion.

 

As he says on the first page, a lot of professional photographers like the M8, but it wasn't suited for his use in Iraq.

 

I know someone that used an M8 in Iraq. I have some of his photographs at work. His M8 is still working, but some of the grit from Iraq mucked up the wheel for the Menu's.

 

Flickr: tightsqueez's Photostream

 

M8 seems like a fine camera so far. If you like Nikon, and do not like a crop factor, get a D700. If the 1.5x crop of the Nikon D2h was not an issue, the M8's 1.3x will not be either. Figure that scanners, slide-mounts, and prints have a 1.1x crop factor from a 35mm negative.

[MikeMyers]

M8 seems like a fine camera so far. If you like Nikon, and do not like a crop factor, get a D700. If the 1.5x crop of the Nikon D2h was not an issue, the M8's 1.3x will not be either. Figure that scanners, slide-mounts, and prints have a 1.1x crop factor from a 35mm negative.

 

 

If I read his choices correctly, it's one of the following:

 

"Alternative is to buy for ~1K a used D2X or any other relatively cheap Nikon body. But I don't like to carry around this heavy stuff, and scare people.

 

So: knowing that M9 exists, not being able to buy it, tried M8 — would you suggest to get rid of Nikon stuff and go with M8?"

 

-----------------------------------

 

Selling all his Nikon gear to get a D700 wouldn't make sense to me, based on what he posted. He's better off keeping his lenses, selling the D2h for a couple of hundred dollars (if that) and getting a used D2x. Or, selling his gear and getting an M8.

 

I suggested he keep both, but that's not practical either, financially (from what he posted).

 

The more I think about this, why sell a camera that sold new for $3200 not all that many years ago, for only a couple of hundred dollars? Simplest thing is to shoot in (M)anual mode, buy a meter, and save up for whatever camera system he prefers. That, or send the D2h off to someplace that works on Nikons, and get a firm price for the repair. Depending on what's wrong, it may or may not cost a lot. Or, write to the service people at Nikon - there were some problems in the original D2h cameras that Nikon fixed for free. If what's wrong with your camera is what they considered a factory defect, and it hasn't already been fixed, maybe they'll do it for you at a very low price? You can call them at 1-800-NIKONUX if my memory is right, give them your serial number, explain the situation, and see if that leads anywhere. Maybe you'll be lucky. Nikon is VERY good at taking care of their customers.

 

Then again, you said you do mostly "street photography" though, and a used M8 might be better than the D2h - it certainly would be smaller and lighter!

[BerndReini]

Re: should I sell all my Nikon stuff to buy an M8?

 

Yes.

[glenerrolrd]

From a practical matter ..the crop factor is an overplayed disadvantage. Yes its irritating that you can not use your fast M glass at the desired FOV but you can adjust. A 21 for example provides a 28mm FOV which I found ideal on the M8. A 35 gives you a 47mm or almost a 50mm and a 75 provides a 100mm FOV .... Its a stop slower on the 28FOV (M8 vs M9) because most 21s are f2.8 glass but on the 50 and the 100 its the same. If you want wide and fast or have some favorite M glass then yes its a disadvantage.

 

The shooting in bursts is a disadvantage and its not instant like the Pro body Nikons but again you adjust.

 

I use M9 s but I was really happy with the M8.2 s I used before .

 

If your intention is to do street photography or basically have your camera always ...the M is still my first choice ..after that its just money that decides which body and lenses. The M8 is a good choice ...pay a little more for one in good condition or with the upgraded shutter.

[lct]

Re: should I sell all my Nikon stuff to buy an M8?

 

Nikon bodies yes but lenses no. You will miss them soon or late when you need a dSLR.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[john_newell]

For many people, (D)SLR and (D)RF are complementary, not exclusive, so selling one to buy the other may be counterproductive, cash aside.

 

For Thom Hogan's views on intra-Nikon upgrades, see this: Nikon DSLR Update Advice by Thom Hogan You may/may not really need to upgrade your DSLR?